--- a/tr.html	Tue Feb 04 22:12:13 2014 +0400
+++ b/tr.html	Tue Feb 04 23:06:22 2014 +0400
@@ -625,15 +625,12 @@
         <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong> four weeks
         after publication, and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be longer for
         complex documents,</li>
-      <li>If the document has previously been published as a Candidate
-        Recommendation, <em class="rfc2119">must</em> document the changes
-        since the previous Candidate Recommendation, </li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the specification has received
         <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>, and</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> identify features in the document that
         are considered "at risk". These features <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
-        be removed before advancement to Recommendation without a requirement to
-        publish a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
+        be removed before advancement to Proposed Recommendation without a
+        requirement to publish a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
     </ul>
     <p>The Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em> announce the publication of a
       Candidate Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public, and <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
@@ -653,17 +650,38 @@
         expected next step)</li>
       <li><a href="#Note">Working Group Note</a></li>
     </ul>
-    <p class="issue">Add an explanation of publishing a revised Candidate
-      Recommendation. <a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/77">ISSUE-77</a></p>
-    <p>If there are any <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a>
-      made to a Candidate Recommendation other than to remove features
-      explicitly identified as "at risk", the Working Group <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
-      repeat the full process of publication as a Candidate Recommendation
-      before the Working Group can request Recommendation status.</p>
     <p> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/organization.html#AC">Advisory
         Committee</a> representatives <em class="rfc2119">may</em> <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/acreview.html#ACAppeal">appeal</a>
       the decision to advance the technical report.</p>
     <h4 id="revised-cr">7.4.1 Revised Candidate Recommendation</h4>
+    <p>If there are any <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a>
+      made to a Candidate Recommendation other than to remove features
+      explicitly identified as "at risk", the Director <em class="rfc2119">must</em>&nbsp;
+      approve the publication of a revised Candidate Recommendation. This is
+      because substantive changes will generally require a new Exclusion Opportunity
+      per <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy/#sec-Exclusion">section
+        4</a> of the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C
+        Patent Policy</a> [<a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>].
+      Note that approval is <em>expected</em> to be fairly simple compared to
+      getting approval for a transition to Candidate Recommendation.</p>
+    <p>In addition the Working Group</p>
+    <ul>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the revised specification
+        meets all Working Group requirements, or explain why the requirements
+        have changed or been deferred,</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> specify the deadline for further
+        comments, which <em class="rfc2119">must</em> be <strong>at least</strong>
+        four weeks after publication, and <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be
+        longer for complex documents,</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document the changes since the previous
+        Candidate Recommendation, </li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the proposed changes have
+        received <a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>, and</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> identify features in the document that
+        are considered "at risk". These features <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
+        be removed before advancement to Proposed Recommendation without a
+        requirement to publish a new Candidate Recommendation.</li>
+    </ul>
     <h3 id="rec-pr">7.5 Proposed Recommendation</h3>
     <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
         requirements for advancement</a>,</p>